Everyone who participates on this website, and lurkers as well, should subscribe to Golfweek.

Why ?

Because it's one of the few National publications that devotes space to Golf Course Architecture, and for that reason alone, we should support it.

In addition, when subscribing, you should write to the editor and tell them WHY you're subscribiing, because you're interested in Golf and Architecture in particular.

If one of the goals of the site is to make people more aware of golf course architecture, then surely the support of another medium, a National Magazine, which does that, should be on our agenda.

Plus, you'll like the magazine.

Patrick, I agree about Golfweek.  I know there are mixed opinions about Links Magazine on this site but it also highlights courses new and old on both sides of the "pond."

Shivas

They don't change that much, 72-69-71 still pays about $237.21. What a way to try and make a living.

It's nice to see raters who as part of their pay get free subscriptions endorse the product....but anyway....it is an enjoyable rag..

Good point Jeff..I like my Myrtle Beach ads in the middle of the mag like last week...what a load of puke that was..

A paying subscriber..JK

In all seriousness,

I have a copy of the current Golfweek in front of me with Tiger on the cover....that must have been a tough editorial decision.  But anyway....could anyone please refer me to an architectural discussion inside the cover...I have read Brad's review of Grande Pines...and I just can't see where that is anything but a description of an experience without any insight into the architecture of the course...unless you think.."and every hole has one or two really devilish hole placements." is architectural commentary..I like that they are really devilish because just devilish doesn't cut it...and really, really devilish is hardly pinable..

Scott,

I'm not even swinging at that softball....as to your IM..I'm not going to discuss something on this site that Ran has already deleted once....I would advise you to read my blog on a daily basis if you want to keep up with the current trends in golfonics..

A direct quote from the cover of this weeks Golfweek:

ARCHITECTURE P39
Get on course at the range

Brad Klein goes on in the article on how to practice to get your A game from the practice tee to the course....when do we get the swing tips to boot....I'm honestly on the floor laughing how this topic got confused with architecture.

Pat...have you actually read the magazine..

JB,

Keeping it positive...Have you read the recent Travel File in Golf Digest called...All You Can Eat It's a little ditty about golf in your beloved Louisiana by famed architectural critic Ron Whitten.  The article seems every bit a solid as what is in Golfweek...architecturally speaking that is..

jakab,

When Time Warner comes calling to turn your blog into serious dough, you'll be churning out covers of Tiger and spooling Myrtle ads like nobody's biz.........c'mon, you know what the deal is - why criticize it? All things in balance....

If for no other reason, Golfweek is the biggest follower and supporter of amateur golf their is out there in pubication.

It is a great source of all the golf info, and I could not be a bigger endorser of Pats comments.

Every serious golfer should subscribe,the major magazines need the competition to keep them more honest.
As for the amount of content that is advertising based, have you ever counted the % of such in golf digest or golf magazine..they are both like real estate magazines!!!!

Links may have some real estate ads, but thumbing through those is well worth it to get to the course profiles and insightful articles.  

I look awful forward each issue to the Classic course and modern course profiles.

John, as usual, you're interest in scoring points comes at the sake of basic comprehension. The column is about how the design of ranges differs from that of a golf course in ways that contribute to players making poor use of their range time. I then suggest ways in which you can bridge the gap in the range/course experience by altering how you practice and how you manage your game during a round. That's a practical aspect of architecture. Not that I think you'll get it.

JakaB,

Golfweek usually devotes a full page or two or more to golf course architecture.

The most recent addition devotes over a page to Grande Pines, with the rater's notebook summarizing the ten or so categories used in the rating process.

I don't know how you missed page 38, unless Brad's picture on page 39 distracted you  , and you glossed over page 38 and the first part of page 39.

The article on page 39 deals with ranges.

My point was that Golfweek typically devotes a section to golf course architecture, and most other golf magazines don't.
And, as such, we should support the magazine.

I pay for my subscription and have no vested interest in the magazine or anything remotely related to it.

I am not a rater.

I'm sure that we can find fault with almost anything in life, including golf courses people have never played.  But, I thought that supporting and subscribing to Golfweek was a general step in the right direction.

I thought that letting the editor know that there is a body of golf enthusiasts who crave articles about golf course architecture, was a good idea, which might lead the publication to devoting even more space on the subject.

Doug S,

The image the instructor was trying to create involved swinging rythmically down and through.  Any abrupt moves would knock the child off the swing (the clubface as the seat of a chain swing in his drawing, with the child holding on to the two parallel chains running perpendicular to the clubface).

One of the  problems with instruction on magazines is that you often get opposing theories on techniques from issue to issue.  I've seen tips for the same type of  sand shots where the ball is played well forward on the stance, well back, and in between, with a wide open face, square, or even closed.

Unfortunately, this can be said that this is true also on the instruction tee.  Personally, I once had a famous teacher tell me within a period of 30 or so days that I swung the club like a woman to "you're a big guy, why are you overswinging?"  Believe me, I didn't overcook the firt lesson.

In regards to Golfweek, I would like to see a condensed John Strawn ("Driving the Green"?) series on the development of a golf course- the principals involved, how the architect is chosen, objectives of the project, the planning and permitting process (with a time-line), a generalized step-by-step description of the major components of the construction process, selection of grasses, grassing, clubshouse construction, opening, and some of the financial details.  Friars Head or even Brad's home muni would be interesting subjects.

On Dr. Klein's article about the range and the course, R.T.J., II wrote a book about how understanding architecture can help you play the course.  Brad's piece takes it one step further, though from the outset.  Most of us would do better on the course if we practiced more like we play, particularly, hitting out of the rough, uneven lies, and devote much more time to the short game.  Unfortunately, most of us are just trying to find a bit of consistency which even under the best conditions (from a perfect lie), we have an extremely hard time doing.